One of the most troubling aspects of dealing with past injustice in the former East Block is the conflict between positive law and law as the expression of higher principles of justice. In his Die Metaphysik der Sitten, Kant attempts to give content to, and place limitations on, what one may reasonably call "law". The purpose of this paper is to examine Kant's theories of commutative justice in a state of nature and distributive justice in a civil state in an (...) effort to define principles that are binding for every legal system. The paper examines two sets of four cases, namely 1) equity, necessity, pardons and duels; and 2) gifts, loans, bona fide purchasers and oaths, where Kant establishes limitations on state power with respect to the individual and to the society of individuals as a whole. Kant's legal system reveals itself to be a system devoted to liberal individualism and the maximum of protection of individual liberties. Einer der am meisten beunruhigenden Aspekte beim Umgang mit vergangenem Unrecht im früheren Ostblock besteht in dem Konflikt zwischen positivem Recht einerseits und Recht als Ausdruck höherer Prinzipien der Gerechtigkeit andererseits. In seinem Werk Die Metaphysik der Sitten versucht Kant, Inhalt und Grenzen dessen zu bestimmen, was man vernünftigerweise als "Recht" bezeichnen kann. Die Aufgabe dieses Beitrags besteht darin, Kants Theorien kommutativer Gerechtigkeit im Naturzustand sowie distributiver Gerechtigkeit im bürgerlichen Zustand zu untersuchen, um auf diese Weise Prinzipien zu ermitteln, die für jedes Rechtssystem bindend sind. Es werden dabei zwei Gruppen von je vier Fällen näher betrachtet, und zwar 1) Billigkeit, Notstand, Duell und Gnadenerweis sowie 2) Schenkung, Leihe, Gutglaubenserwerb und Eidesleistung, in denen Kant der staatlichen Macht im Hinblick auf das Individuum und die Gesellschaft der Individuen insgesamt Grenzen zieht. Kants Rechtssystem erweist sich hier als ein System, das dem liberalen Individualismus und einem maximalen Schutz individueller Freiheit verpflichtet ist. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Learning to BreatheFive Fragments Against RacismB. Venkat Mani (bio)For Dr. JLW, for all Black academics and students1. Air HungerI know you, Derek Chauvin. You may think that we first met on May 25, 2020, in Minneapolis. I was called George Perry Floyd. For you, I was just another Black man, a potential criminal. For me, you were not a police officer, but the knee that stands for racism. You (...) kneeled on my windpipe for 9 minutes and 29 seconds. Those were neither my first nor my last memories.You may choose not to recognize me, as you always have. But I do. I recognize every bone, muscle, tendon, pointy curve of the cap, every contour of your strong, heavy, determined, calculating, conniving knee that presses on my windpipe with a false sense of racist superiority. 9 minutes and 29 seconds. As often as you can.We have a history. You have never missed the opportunity of kneeling on my windpipe. You hauled me into your slave ships from various African ports along the Atlantic, then you kneeled on my windpipe all over your cotton and tobacco plantations in the Americas. We met again on schooners from Indian shores journeying across the Indian and Pacific oceans. With slavery banned in the British empire, you turned me into an indentured laborer. You made me put my thumb imprint on a document you created, in a script I could not read, of a language I could not speak. Then you threw me thousands of miles away in Mauritius, Fiji, and numerous Caribbean islands, pressing on my windpipe on sugarcane plantations. My wife, children, sisters, mothers, aunts, brothers, uncles, nephews, nieces, grandparents, great grandparents, we all have lived through those fatal 9 minutes and 29 seconds: on water and land. Repeatedly. Consistently. Incessantly.You want specific dates? April 8, 1857, Barrackpore, Northern India. My name was Mangal Pandey, you called me a Sepoy. You hanged me for standing up against my subjugation by your British East India Company. Against your rule over my land and my people. With your many titles [End Page 41] and names: Major-General Sir Henry Havelock, Lieutenant-General Sir Colin Campbell, Brigadier-General Charles Windham, you rampaged through the streets of Delhi, Meerut, Lucknow, killing anyone in your way so I could be a jewel in Victoria's crown. January 29, 1863, Bear River, Idaho. I was one among the Shoshone of Bia Ogoi, you were Colonel Patrick Connor. You came to us on a frigid morning and killed us by the hundreds. November 15, 1884, the Congo Conference, Berlin. You were called Chancellor Otto von Bismarck and were acting at the behest of sharecropping interests of King Leopold the Second. Your name for me was a "savage." You set up a society to civilize me while you plundered my bounty. You started drawing lines through land, rivers, mountains, deserts. For you, it was the Scramble for Africa. For me, bloody murder. You knelt on my windpipe, smoking a pipe with tobacco my people had grown. April 13, 1919, Jallianwala Bagh, Amritsar. You were called Brigadier General Reginald Edward Harry Dyer. For you, I was just a troublemaking native disrupting the civilized business of the Empire. You surrounded our peaceful gathering in Amritsar and opened fire. Your Nobel Laureate Rudyard Kipling claimed that "you did your duty as you saw fit." By killing us in thousands until the bullets ran out. Rikki Tikki Tavi. May 31, 1921, Tulsa, Oklahoma. Inspired by Jim Crow, your knees came running to us in mobs to massacre us. October 19, 1926, Imperial Conference, London. Your name was Field Marshall the Right Honorable Jan Christian Smuts. For you, I was one among the many "colored" subjects from the Cape Colony. You spoke vehemently against mixing my people with your people. Eloquently, I was told, in favor of apartheid.You know very well, Chauvin, that our acquaintance neither begins in 1857 nor ends in 1926. I could take you on a grand tour of the world and give you all the dates when you appeared in different forms. Your self-induced conviction of racial supremacy over me remained the same... (shrink)

Med hjemmel i de lovfestede spesielle god skikk-reglene har flere yrker utformet yrkesetiske regler med en lovmessig forankring. Denne artikkelen tar utgangspunkt i fem yrker og gir en juridisk analyse av god revisorskikk, god advokatskikk, god regnskapsføringsskikk, god meglerskikk og god landmålerskikk. Formålet er å sammenligne den rettslige betydningen av disse SGS-reglene. De sammenlignes ut fra hjemmelsgrunnlaget og hvilken bransjeorganisasjon som har utformet de yrkesetiske reglene, autorisasjonsordning og en hypotese om at de yrkesetiske reglene inneholder følgende elementer: profesjonsansvar, integritet, objektivitet, (...) taushetsplikt og kompetansekrav.Sammenligningen viser at lovfestede SGS-regler har ført til at de aktuelle bransjeorganisasjonene har tatt ansvar for å utforme de yrkesetiske reglene. Når det gjelder autorisasjonsordningen, har Finanstilsynet ansvaret for autorisasjonene til revisorer, regnskapsførere og eiendomsmeglere. For advokater har Tilsynsrådet for advokatvirksomhet ansvaret for å føre tilsyn med advokatbevillingene, mens landmålerne ikke er underlagt en autorisasjonsordning.Analysen viser at en finner de fem elementene både i god revisorskikk, god advokatskikk, god regnskapsføringsskikk og god landmålerskikk. God meglerskikk er derimot svært forskjellig fra de andre yrkesetiske reglene. Samlet viser analysene at de yrkesetiske reglene har en viss rettslig betydning, selv om den varierer.Nøkkelord: lovfestede god skikk-regler, yrkesetiske reglerEnglish summary: The significance of ethical rules based on legislated rules for Code of ConductIn accordance with statutory authority rules for Code of conduct, several professions have designed ethical rules with a legal foundation. This article is based on a legal analysis of CoC for auditors, lawyers, accountants, real estate agents and for land surveyors. The purpose of the article is to compare the legal significance of these rules for the CoC. The various rules for CoC are compared in terms of their legal basis, the professional organisation which has designed the professional ethical rules and the system of authorisation. The rules for CoC are also compared in a hypothesis about five elements. The hypothesis is that the ethical rules contain the following elements: professionalism, integrity, objectivity, confidentiality and competency.The comparison shows that legislated rules for CoC have enabled the relevant professional organisations to take responsibility for designing professional ethical rules. In the case of system of authorisation, the «Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway» is responsible for authorising auditors, accountants and real estate agents. For lawyers the «Supervisory Council For Legal Practice» is responsible for supervising their authorisation, whereas land surveyors are not subject to an authorisation system – either public or professional.The analysis shows that one can find all five elements in the CoC for auditors, lawyers, accountants, and land surveyors. The CoC for real estate agents, however, is different from the other ethical rules. Overall, the analysis shows that the ethical rules have a certain legal significance, although it varies. (shrink)

I share Kulagin's bewilderment over the term "work-situation theme." There is something unnatural in dividing literature - the study of human beings - into topics and headings. How many kinds of prose we have heard of in recent years: working class, rural, urban, youth, military, intellectual, personal, industrial. The eruptions and outbursts occurring in literary life tend largely to eliminate these lines of demarcation, and then the arguments rage not so much upon themes as about language, creative style, characters, and (...) the degree to which the writer was successful in depicting the full richness and variety of life. (shrink)

Context: Due to its grounding in a simplistic core model, mainstream theoretical work in economics is heavily conditioned by a realist epistemic framework that may be viewed as the “paradogma” – sensu Mitterer – of economics. Problem: The contribution delineates theoretical developments on the basis of a realist epistemology and their problem-laden consequences for the economic sciences. The subsequent critical discussion seeks to clarify whether economic theory formation is a suitable field for the application of Mitterer’s non-dualist ideas. Method: In (...) the context of a review of their historical background, the paper will explore the possibilities and limits of an application of Mitterer’s non-dualist argumentation to the economic sciences, and present a diagnosis of compatibility and a characterisation of necessary steps towards amplification. Results: It can be shown that the economic sciences would gain in expert knowledge and applicability by adopting the alternative of non-dualism, whose potential has been little appreciated so far. The solution to the meta-scientific problems caused by the pre-structuring of economics in terms of a realist epistemology seems at hand. To take up this new meta-scientific perspective, however, theoretical progress in both non-dualism and economics is required, particularly by paying more serious attention to the theoretical component of communication. Implications: Non-dualism can certainly be utilised by the economic sciences to induce radical innovations and conceptional revisions involving higher meta-scientific consistency. In future, pragmatic gaps will increasingly have to be filled conceptually in order to develop more highly-reflected economic theory formation and corresponding scientific practice. Hence the main idea is that economic actions are inevitably, but not exclusively, based on communication. Constructivist content: Theoretical approaches embracing epistemic relativism in the economic sciences will be properly assessed and developed further along the lines of a non-dualist conceptual revision on the basis of an ontology-free understanding of reality. (shrink)